Frustration and patience: the saga of publishing at Hillsdale
Liz Klimas
Issue date: 3/27/08 Section: News
All who hope to publish in academic journals - students and professors - face a similar daunting process.
Senior Tory Moul has written, but waits. Senior Kristina Weaver is stuck in revision. And Nikolai Wenzel, assistant professor of economics, wades through all publishing stages: researching, writing, waiting, even celebrating previous publication.
These Hillsdale College students and professor find themselves in the long, arduous process of peer-reviewed academic publishing. It is a process Gary Wolfram, professor of political economy, said could take up to two years from start to print.
Wenzel claims three published papers, two in the revise and resubmit stage, five under peer review and is drafting two.
"It is a frustrating and infuriating process," Wenzel said. "It is an exercise in learning the virtue of patience."
Researching
Wenzel said the first step is to form an idea, gleaned from reading or talking to friends.
For Moul, a psychology major, this idea involved failures in self-regulation of eating. The psychology major, like science majors, requires students to conduct research their junior and senior years.
Moul's study, on the mechanisms of disinhibition in dietary restraint, resulted in findings she considered significant.
"I have good reason to believe it's publishable," she said. "The results were significant, and I'd like the community of researchers working on this problem to know what I found."
Moul spent more than 30 hours on lab experiments for her project.
Wenzel said those in the publishing process familiarize themselves with what papers or experiments have been done, and what is being said in a field.
"You need to figure out if your idea is stupid, obvious or irrelevant," he said.
Science majors read published experiments in scientific journals and conduct an experiment.
"It's cool to be able to contribute to the scientific community and the community at large," Weaver said.
Revision
The second step in publishing often involves a conference or public presentation. At Hillsdale, this is a presentation of findings to students and professors in that department.
Wenzel said once the research is written, at least for economics, the writer presents the topic at a conference where peers discuss and question the ideas.
"You can go into a conference thinking you have a really good idea but come out of the conference thinking you have a kernel of a good idea," he said. "The idea of a conference is something that is friendlier than a journal editor but more formal than your buddy sitting in a bar."
When paper is finished, the writer submits it to a journal. Moul said one can usually only submit to one journal at a time, making the choice of journal an important decision.
"You have to consider how significant your results are," she said. "There are different levels of journals. More broadly significant results are usually published in a more significant journal."
Waiting
Though Moul waits for a reply, she finds herself unworried.
"I am especially chill about it now," Moul said, referring to graduate school acceptance. "I wanted [getting published] to help me get into grad school. Now, I am just more concerned with the implications of my results for my own future work, with the best way to think about failures of self-regulation."
Moul said she is torn between acceptance and rejection.
"Part of me hopes I can go back a rework some things, some variables I didn't measure," she said. "I could do that and do it bigger and better in grad school. There are a bunch of questions I haven't answered."
Response
There are four scenarios Wenzel said could happen when a journal responds to a submission.
The first is "the holy grail," which means minimal changes and quick publishing. Wenzel said he received this response once.
The second response, "revise and resubmit," ranges in suggestion from shifting emphasis to correcting upwards of 150 items. This eventually will lead to publication. Wenzel currently has two papers like this pending, which he has "not yet had time to touch."
Sometimes editors ask writers to change things to how editors would have written them, Wolfram said.
Third possibility: rejection.
"Sometimes this comes with feedback, which is good," Wenzel said. "Other times you get, 'Your paper contains no valid economic thought.'"
No response, positive or negative, is the fourth scenario. Wenzel said this is the most frustrating and forces a writer to make a decision. The writer can ignore the comments and immediately send it to another journal, revise and submit to another journal, or revise and submit to the original journal, Wenzel said.
Aftermath
For Moul, one of the goals of publishing was to aid her graduate school applications, though her acceptance ultimately was not affected. Instead, Moul said she found more value in her discovery and honed her interests in specific psychology subjects.
Wenzel, on the other hand, said he loves seeing his name in print. He envisioned himself, after his first publication acceptance, popping open the champagne and celebrating. In reality, he thought to himself, "That's good."
"It's almost like how you feel walking out of your last exam: excited, but ready to move onto something else," he said.
Senior Tory Moul has written, but waits. Senior Kristina Weaver is stuck in revision. And Nikolai Wenzel, assistant professor of economics, wades through all publishing stages: researching, writing, waiting, even celebrating previous publication.
These Hillsdale College students and professor find themselves in the long, arduous process of peer-reviewed academic publishing. It is a process Gary Wolfram, professor of political economy, said could take up to two years from start to print.
Wenzel claims three published papers, two in the revise and resubmit stage, five under peer review and is drafting two.
"It is a frustrating and infuriating process," Wenzel said. "It is an exercise in learning the virtue of patience."
Researching
Wenzel said the first step is to form an idea, gleaned from reading or talking to friends.
For Moul, a psychology major, this idea involved failures in self-regulation of eating. The psychology major, like science majors, requires students to conduct research their junior and senior years.
Moul's study, on the mechanisms of disinhibition in dietary restraint, resulted in findings she considered significant.
"I have good reason to believe it's publishable," she said. "The results were significant, and I'd like the community of researchers working on this problem to know what I found."
Moul spent more than 30 hours on lab experiments for her project.
Wenzel said those in the publishing process familiarize themselves with what papers or experiments have been done, and what is being said in a field.
"You need to figure out if your idea is stupid, obvious or irrelevant," he said.
Science majors read published experiments in scientific journals and conduct an experiment.
"It's cool to be able to contribute to the scientific community and the community at large," Weaver said.
Revision
The second step in publishing often involves a conference or public presentation. At Hillsdale, this is a presentation of findings to students and professors in that department.
Wenzel said once the research is written, at least for economics, the writer presents the topic at a conference where peers discuss and question the ideas.
"You can go into a conference thinking you have a really good idea but come out of the conference thinking you have a kernel of a good idea," he said. "The idea of a conference is something that is friendlier than a journal editor but more formal than your buddy sitting in a bar."
When paper is finished, the writer submits it to a journal. Moul said one can usually only submit to one journal at a time, making the choice of journal an important decision.
"You have to consider how significant your results are," she said. "There are different levels of journals. More broadly significant results are usually published in a more significant journal."
Waiting
Though Moul waits for a reply, she finds herself unworried.
"I am especially chill about it now," Moul said, referring to graduate school acceptance. "I wanted [getting published] to help me get into grad school. Now, I am just more concerned with the implications of my results for my own future work, with the best way to think about failures of self-regulation."
Moul said she is torn between acceptance and rejection.
"Part of me hopes I can go back a rework some things, some variables I didn't measure," she said. "I could do that and do it bigger and better in grad school. There are a bunch of questions I haven't answered."
Response
There are four scenarios Wenzel said could happen when a journal responds to a submission.
The first is "the holy grail," which means minimal changes and quick publishing. Wenzel said he received this response once.
The second response, "revise and resubmit," ranges in suggestion from shifting emphasis to correcting upwards of 150 items. This eventually will lead to publication. Wenzel currently has two papers like this pending, which he has "not yet had time to touch."
Sometimes editors ask writers to change things to how editors would have written them, Wolfram said.
Third possibility: rejection.
"Sometimes this comes with feedback, which is good," Wenzel said. "Other times you get, 'Your paper contains no valid economic thought.'"
No response, positive or negative, is the fourth scenario. Wenzel said this is the most frustrating and forces a writer to make a decision. The writer can ignore the comments and immediately send it to another journal, revise and submit to another journal, or revise and submit to the original journal, Wenzel said.
Aftermath
For Moul, one of the goals of publishing was to aid her graduate school applications, though her acceptance ultimately was not affected. Instead, Moul said she found more value in her discovery and honed her interests in specific psychology subjects.
Wenzel, on the other hand, said he loves seeing his name in print. He envisioned himself, after his first publication acceptance, popping open the champagne and celebrating. In reality, he thought to himself, "That's good."
"It's almost like how you feel walking out of your last exam: excited, but ready to move onto something else," he said.
Be the first to comment on this story